NUCLEAR STRUCTURE HISTORY
By Prof. Lefteris Kaliambos (Λ. Καλιαμπός) Τ.Ε. Institute of Larissa Greece July 10, 2015 In the history of nuclear physics after the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron (1932), it was clear that the atomic nucleus is made up from protons and neutrons. However in such a system of an assumed uncharged neutron physicists abandoned incorrectly the well-established laws of electromagnetic forces in favor of fallacious theories and nuclear structure models. Therefore, a wrong concept of a fallacious strong nuclear force was introduced. In 1935, the first invalid theory for such a fallacious force was developed by the Japanese physicist Hideki Yukawa, who suggested incorrectly that the nucleons would exchange particles between each other and this mechanism would create the force. Yukawa constructed his false theory in analogy to a wrong theory of the invalid quantum electrodynamics in which physicists under the influence of Einstein’s massless quanta of fields abandoned the well-established laws of at a distance interaction and introduced the false idea that the interaction is due to the exchange of a (massless) photon. In this photo I am with the eminent physicist Dr Th. Kalogeropoulos, who came from Princeton University to present work at the nuclear conference held at NCSR "Democritos " (2002), where I presented also my paper "Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of.electromagnetism" rejecting Einstein's relativity. As an Einstein student under the influence of the contradicting relativity theories initially he criticized my discovery of the simple nuclear force which modifies the so-called “mass-energy equivalence”. In the case of the nuclear force, Yukawa assumed incorrectly that the “force-makers” (which were eventually called “mesons”) carry a mass of a fraction of the nucleon mass. Similar to such a theoretical particle predicted by Yukawa was found in 1947 in cosmic ray and in 1948 in the laboratory and called the pion. Note that Yukawa for his fallacious idea was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1949. In the 1950s and 60s more mesons were found in accelerator experiments and the meson theory of nuclear forces was extended to include many mesons. These wrong models became known as one-boson-exchange models, which is a reference to the fact that the different mesons are exchanged singly in this model. The one-boson-exchange model was the hypothesis in explaining incorrectly all properties of the nucleon-nucleon interaction at low energies. Moreover in the absence of a realistic nuclear force a number of fallacious nuclear structure models were developed. The liquid drop model was one of the first models of nuclear structure, proposed by Weizsäcker in 1935. It described the nucleus as a semiclassical fluid made up of neutrons and protons, with an internal repulsive electrostatic force proportional to the number of protons. The assumption of nucleus as a drop of Fermi liquid was still widely used in the form of Finite Range Droplet Model (FRDM), due to the possible good reproduction of nuclear binding energy on the whole chart, with the necessary accuracy for predictions of unknown nuclei. Although the liquid drop model was generally quite adequate, there were significant departures whenever the number N of neutrons and Z of protons is close to 2, 20, 28, 50, 82, or (for N) 126. Near these so-called magic numbers the binding energy of the last nucleon is unusually large. The strong binding of nucleons near magic numbers was reminiscent of the great stability of inert-gas atoms and suggests that there may be some sort of “ shell structure” in nuclei. In atoms the shell structure was assumed to be a direct consequence of the Pauli principle according to which two electrons of opposite spin provide a great binding energy . For example in Hydrogen with one electron we observe a binding energy of -13.6 eV while in helium with two electrons of opposite spin we observe a binding energy of -79 eV. In fact, the great binding energy of helium atom is due not to the qualitative approaches of the so-called exclusion principle, but to the Coulomb law and to my discovery of the vibration energy of two electrons of opposite spin. ( See my EXPLANATION OF HELIUM IONIZATIONS). If the nuclear force were predominantly a central force, we would classify also nuclear states according to angular momentum quantum numbers. The nuclear shell was proposed by Maria Mayer and H. Jensen who shared the 1963 Nobel Prize in physics. However, after my discovery of the nuclear force and structure, the nuclear force is much different from the Coulomb force and is, moreover, strongly spin- dependent. ( See my STRUCTURE OF MAGIC NUCLEI). Note that the nuclear shell model was based strongly on the Pauli principle which cannot be applied in the simplest structure of nuclei. For example in the binding energy of deuteron we observe parallel spin, while the Pauli prinsiple is based on the opposite spin. Nevertheless in “Nuclear structure -WIKIPEDIA” one reads: “The concept of shells allows one to understand why some nuclei are bound more tightly than others. This is because two nucleons of the same kind cannot be in the same state (Pauli exclusion principle). So the lowest-energy state of the nucleus is one where nucleons fill all energy levels from the bottom up to some level. A nucleus with full shells is exceptionally stable, as will be explained”. Of course the fallacious theories of nuclear structure cannot form a unified model because in the absence of a realistic nuclear force all nuclear properties could be predicted from a set of assumptions. Under such incorrect ideas a model of independent particles was also introduced. For such a fallacious model in WIKIPEDIA one reads: “The main idea of the Independent Particle approach is that a nucleon moves inside a certain potential well (which keeps it bound to the nucleus) independently from the other nucleons. This amounts to replacing a N-body problem (N particles interacting) by N single-body problems.” On the other hand in the 1970s and 80s, for understanding more the nuclear force several invalid meson models were developed that went beyond the simple single-particle exchange mechanism. These wrong models included, in particular, the explicit exchange of two pions with all its complications. Well-known models of the latter kind are the Paris (Lacombe et al.,1980) and the Bonn potential (Machleidt et al., 1987). However, with the development of a new fallacious theory (in the 1970s) that the so- called strong interaction is due to a false “color force” of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and not meson theory, all “meson theories” had to be viewed as models, and the attempts to derive a proper theory of the nuclear force had to start all over again. Of course after the abandonment of the well-established natural laws the problem with a derivation of nuclear forces from QCD was two-fold. First, each nucleon consists of three quarks such that the system of two nucleons is already a six-body problem. Second, the force between quarks, which was assumed to be created by the exchange of gluons, has the feature of being very strong at the low energy scale that is characteristic of nuclear physics. This extraordinary strength makes it difficult to find “converging” mathematical solutions. Under such fallacious ideas for the nuclear structure models in the "Nuclear physics -Wikipedia" one reads: “A heavy nucleus can contain hundreds of nucleons which means that with some approximation it can be treated as a classical system, rather than a quantum-mechanical one. In the resulting liquid-drop model, the nucleus has an energy which arises partly from surface tension and partly from electrical repulsion of the protons. The liquid-drop model is able to reproduce many features of nuclei, including the general trend of binding energy with respect to mass number, as well as the phenomenon of nuclear fission. Superimposed on this classical picture, however, are quantum-mechanical effects, which can be described using the nuclear shell model, developed in large part by Maria Goeppert-Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen. Nuclei with certain numbers of neutrons and protons (the magic numbers 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126, ...) are particularly stable, because their shells are filled.” Other more complicated models for the nuclear structure based on the invalid relativity have also been proposed. Under this PHYSICS CRISIS I presented at the international conference “Frontiers of fundamental physics” (1993) my paper ‘Impact of Maxwell’s equation of displacement current on electromagnetic laws and comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of dipolic particles ”. In that paper I showed that LAWS AND EXPERIMENTS INVALIDATE FIELDS AND RELATIVITY . Surprisingly at the same time in Larissa when I analyzed carefully the experiments of the magnetic moments in protons and neutrons I found that considerable charge distributions in protons and neutrons are able to reveal the nuclear force and nuclear structure by reviving the natural laws of electric and magnetic forces acting at a distance. Whereas the two contradicting theories of mesons and of the Quantum Chromodynamics proposed by Yukawa and Gell-Mann respectively provide fallacious force carriers (mesons) or color forces between false massless gluons which cannot lead to nuclear structure. Although my new discovery of considerable charge distributions in nucleons revealed the nuclear structure by using not the theories but the well-established laws of nature unfortunately these novel ideas met at first much skepticism and occasionally overt resistance. The opposition was very strong when I met privately some theoretical physicists of nuclear physics at the Aristotelian University for explaining the real nuclear force and the nuclear structure based not on the invalid theories of relativity and of the wrong Standard Model but on natural laws of electric and magnetic forces acting at a distance. Unfortunately it seems to be not surprising, because in the history of physics one sees that new fundamental physics concepts many times found invariably difficulties in being accepted by the majority, no matter how well formulated and important they could be. While the ruling of the majorities is a fundamental feature of every democracy, it does not apply to science where the great steps forward have always been made by isolated individuals. This dogmatic hardening under the influence of Maxwell’s fields Einstein’s relativity and the fallacious theories of the Standard Model risks today to make the scientific majorities impenetrable to a critical understanding of my developed FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS CONCEPTS based on the well-established laws of nature. Nevertheless after several years from the publication of my paper NUCLEAR STRUCTURE IS GOVERNED BY THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF ELECTROMAGNETISM in Ind. J. Th. Phys. (2003) today it is well-known that the considerable charge distributions in nucleons deduced from the experiments of the magnetic moments give very important results invalidating the two different theories of meson and of the Quantum Chromodynamics. For example the nuclear experiments showed that the simple (uud) for proton and the (dud ) for neutron are wrong schemes, because the mass of the discovered quarks by Gell-Mann cannot be compared with the mass of nucleons. Moreover according to my discovery of the Photon-Matter Interaction the hypothetical energy of massless gluons cannot turn into the mass of nucleons. Also such wrong schemes in proton and neutron could not be compared with the deep inelastic scattering and the experiments of the magnetic moments μ for proton and neutron. According to the deep inelastic scattering experiments the fallacious scheme (uud) for proton should give a negative charge (– e/3) at the center surrounded by the positive charge of ( +4e/3) , while Sanders in 1957 for the proton of mass M and spin S found that μ/S = 2.793(e/M). Our detailed analysis of this formula based on laws showed that in proton among 288 quarks there exist 9 extra charged quarks giving negative charge of -q = -5e//3 at the center and positive charge of +Q = +8e/3 along the periphery. In the same way though Dirac in his wrong theory of relativistic quantum mechanics (1928) proposed that the g-factor of neutron is zero, N. R. Corngold and N. F. Ramsey in 1956 found that in neutron the g-factor is g = -1.913. ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTION OF THE EXTRA CHARGED QUARKS IN NUCLEONS LED TO MY DISCOVERY OF NUCLEAR FORCE AND NUCLEAR STRUCTURE, WHILE THE uud AND dud SCHEMES OF GELL-MANN CANNOT LEAD TO THE NUCLEAR STRUCTURE Theoretical explanations of atomic, molecular, and solid state phenomena may present formidable mathematical difficulties, but it is at least true that the interactions between the constituent particles are well understood under the applications of the well-established laws of electromagnetism. For these systems the forces the particles exert on each other are entirely of electromagnetic origin. On this basis I found that also in the structure of nuclei the same laws govern the structure since nature works in only one way. It is unfortunate that the discovery of the assumed uncharged neutron for understanding the nuclear structure led to the abandonment of natural laws in favor of various theories of nuclear force and nuclear structure . Even today many nuclear physicists influenced by the wrong Standard Model and by various nuclear models of the nuclear structure do not believe that the fundamental laws of electromagnetism are responsible for the nuclear force and nuclear structure. According to my discovery of the Photon-Matter Interaction which invalidates Einstein’s mass-energy conservation the energy of massless gluons and the so-called color forces of the Quantum Cromodynamics (Gell-mann,1973) cannot give any information about the charge distribution in nucleons for reviving the well-established laws of electromagnetism. Of course the goal of modern science is to apply the well-established laws governing the nuclear phenomena under my discovery of the considerable charge distributions in nucleons due to the extra 9 charged quarks in proton and 12 ones in neutron. However it was a great difficulty in discussing the problem by using a simple math of the well-established laws of Coulomb and Ampere because at very short distances such considerable charge distributions give compound electromagnetic forces of short range like the dipole-dipole interactions. Under this condition I worked from 1993 to 2002 in order to formulate a large number of integral equations presented at the 12th Symposium of the Hellenic nuclear physics Society (NCSR “Demokritos”,(2002 ). So in my paper NUCLEAR STRUCTURE IS GOVERNED BY THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF ELECTROMAGNETISM published in Ind J. Th. Phys. (2003) one sees that the distributed fractional charges in the spinning nucleons explain not only the parallel spin of deuteron but also give the radial binding energy of -2.2246 MeV. Especially using the experimental value of the proton radius (r = 0.88/1015 m ) I found that the applications of electromagnetic forces at the shorter distance of 2r give a proton- neutron binding energy equal to the experimental value of -2.2246 MeV. in this case the nuclear structure is very simple because the proton and the neutron have parallel spin. In other words they seem to be like the two wheels of a moving bicycle. I found also that according to the electromagnetic laws the negligible motional EMF in the coupling of two deuterons is responsible for the strong proton-neutron bonds in the Helium nucleus with a total antiparallel spin along the spin axis. Of course the radial energy and the very strong axial energy imply a great anisotropy which explains the rapidly increase of the binding energy of deuteron to the binding energy of the Helium nucleus (- 28.29 MeV). In this case the very strong axial bonds of the proton-neutron systems overcomes the repulsions of identical nucleons, because the proton-proton repulsions and neutron – neutron repulsions are directed along the diagonals like the ionic crystals. Such structures show also that the so-called Pauli principle of electronic configurations is inapplicable in nuclei since the proton-proton and the neutron-neutron repel, while the simplest structure of the deuteron has parallel spin. In fact, the so-called Pauli principle is the result of electromagnetic laws which give always parallel spin in the simple structure of deuteron with attractive electromagnetic forces of short range. Whereas applications of the same laws give antiparallel spin with electromagnetic repulsions between identical nucleons. For example the energy of the uranium fission under a bombardment by neutrons is due not to Einstein’s mass-energy conservation but to the long ranged electric repulsions between protons which overcome the short ranged attractive forces between protons and neutrons. Note that under the fallacious forces of meson theory or the wrong color forces between the false gluons in the wrong (uud) and (dud) schemes in proton and neutron respectively today theoretical physicists in order to explain the very strong binding energy of the Helium nucleus believe that also the systems of proton-proton and neutron-neutron give unknown attractive forces the so-called residual forces of strong interaction. It is well-known a semiquantitative understanding of the fission process which can be gained from the liquid drop model proposed by Bohr. However under the fallacious theories of Heisenberg (1932) and Yukawa (1935) Bohr could not reveal the real nuclear force of his liquid drop model. On the other hand Yukawa’s meson theory seemed to be valid under the discovery of several masons, but many attempts to fit them into a consistent scheme of nuclear force did not succeed in reproducing quantitatively the known nuclear phenomena. Another serious problem had to do with the proton-proton scattering at high energies which is quite different from the proton-neutron scattering, showing that the so-called hypothesis of charge independence cannot be applied to the scattering data. Nevertheless despite the enormous success of my discovery of the nuclear force and nuclear structure due to the well-established laws of electromagnetic forces, today theoretical physicists under the influence of the fallacious strong interaction of the wrong standard model and the wrong models of nuclear structure continue to believe that the nuclear force is independent of the fundamental charge-charge interaction including also strong attractive forces of proton-proton and neutron-neutron systems. Of course such wrong ideas cannot lead to the nuclear structure and do much to retard the progress of nuclear physics. In fact, in fission the proton-proton repulsions of long range under the bombardment with neutrons overcome the proton-neutron bonds of short range, while in neutron stars the long ranged gravitational attraction overcomes the short-ranged neutron-neutron electromagnetic repulsions. Therefore in the absence of a realistic nuclear force the most important nuclear structure models like the liquid drop, the Fermi gas, the nuclear shell, and the collective model, lead to complications. On the other hand the analysis of the deuteron, alone, based on a hypothetical potential did not provide the desired information about the force of the simplest proton-neutron structure. Of course the hypothetical color forces proposed by Gell-Mann cannot provide any framework for quantitative measurements based on laws. Here I clear that according to my discovery of the nuclear force and nuclear structure due to the application of the well-established laws of nature the magic numbers of nuclei are related to the special shapes of very stable arrangements in widely different groups. For example the simplest magic nucleus the He-4 belongs to the group of the two-dimensional structure. Whereas the first parallelepiped is un unstable nucleus because the proton-proton and neutron-neutron repulsions overcome the proton-neutron bonds. Though the O-16 belongs to the group of parallelepipeds, it is a very stable nucleus because the p-n bonds overcome the p-p and n-n repulsions. It is of of interest to note that the heaviest magic nucleus, the Pb-208, belongs to another group of orthorhombic systems in which the extra neutrons make extra n-p bonds for giving u stable nucleus. (See my STRUCTURE OF MAGIC NUCLEI in my FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS CONCEPTS). Category:Fundamental physics concepts